Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Degradable, absorbable or resorbable—what is the best grammatical modifier for an implant that is eventually absorbed by the body?

可降解、可吸收、再吸收——哪个是描述最终被人体吸收生物材料的最好词汇

  • Review
  • Published:
Science China Materials Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The adoption of grammatical modifier for implants or other kinds of biomaterials eventually absorbed by the body has been a long-standing confusing issue, and there are diverse terms in the large fields of research, which not only causes the difficulties when searching on the Internet, but also blurs the meaning and boundaries for researchers. Prior unification attempts at laws/standards set the basis for such research fields towards researching, labeling, marketing and instructions for use. Considering this, the typical grammatical modifiers “biodegradable”, “resorbable”, “absorbable”, along with their noun forms used in the decades of scientific research have been reviewed and explained, interdisciplinary in chemistry, ecology, materials science, biology, microbiology, medicine, and based on usage customs, laws, standards and markets. The term “biodegradable” has been not only used in biomaterials but also in ecology waste management, biomedicine and even natural environment. Meanwhile, the term “resorbable” has long been used in biological reaction (osteoclast driven bone resorption), but is inappropriate for implants that do not carry the potential to grow back into their original form. The term “absorbable” focuses more on the host metabolism to the foreign biodegradation products of the implanted material/device compared with the term “degradable/biodegradable”. Meanwhile the coherence and normalization of the term“absorbable” carried by its own in laws and standards contributes as well. In general, the authors consider the term “absorbable” to be the best grammatical modifier with respect to other adjectives which share the same inherence. A further internationally unified usage is proposed by us.

摘要

关于最终被人体吸收的植入材料, 领域内文献采用的英文修饰词长期以来混乱且不同, 不仅造成文献检索困难, 同时模糊了研究人 员的研究边界. 此领域在法律法规/标准中统一用词的确定, 为领域内的科学研究、产品销售及产品使用说明奠定了基础. 我们基于化学、 生态学、材料学、生物学、微生物学和药学, 立足于使用习惯、法律、标准和市场, 对领域内使用已久的典型修饰词“生物可降解”、“再 吸收”和“可吸收”进行了讨论和解释. 总的来说, 尽管目前绝大多数修饰语实际想表达的意思相同, 作者认为“可吸收”这一英文修饰语是最 恰当的修饰词. 同时, 我们提议进一步规范和统一该领域修饰词的使用.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mackenzie D. The history of sutures. Med Hist, 1973, 17: 158–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hench LL. Bioceramics. J Am Ceramic Soc, 2005, 81: 1705–1728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Hench LL. Bioceramics: fromconcept to clinic. J AmCeramic Soc, 1991, 74: 1487–1510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Windhagen H, Radtke K, Weizbauer A, et al. Biodegradable magnesium-based screw clinically equivalent to titanium screw in hallux valgus surgery: short term results of the first prospective, randomized, controlled clinical pilot study. BioMed Eng OnLine, 2013, 12: 62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schildwächter M. Biotronik announces CE mark for magmaris, the first clinically-proven bioresorbable magnesium scaffold. http://www.magmaris.com/en/newsroom/june-15-2016

  6. Shalaby SW, Burg KJL. Bioabsorbable polymers update: degradation mechanisms, safety, and application. J App Biomater, 1995, 6: 219–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Vert M, Li SM, Spenlehauer G, et al. Bioresorbability and biocompatibility of aliphatic polyesters. J Mater Sci-Mater Med, 1992, 3: 432–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Vert M. Degradable and bioresorbable polymers in surgery and in pharmacology: beliefs and facts. J Mater Sci-Mater Med, 2009, 20: 437–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Benicewicz BC, Hopper PK. Part I. J Bioactive Compatible Polym, 1990, 5: 453–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Barrows HT. Synthetic bioabsorbable polymers. In: Szycher M (Ed.). High Performance Biomaterials: A Complete Guide toMedical and Pharmceutical Applications. Boca Raton: CRC PRESS, 1991, 243–257

  11. Weiler A, Hoffmann RFG, Stähelin AC, et al. Biodegradable implants in sports medicine: the biological base. Arthroscopy-J Arthroscopic Related Surgery, 2000, 16: 305–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ikada Y, Tsuji H. Biodegradable polyesters for medical and ecological applications. Macromol Rapid Commun, 2000, 21: 117–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ashammakhi N, Peltoniemi H, Waris E, et al. Developments in craniomaxillofacial surgery: use of self-reinforced bioabsorbable osteofixation devices. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2001, 108: 167–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Vert M, Doi Y, Hellwich KH, et al. Terminology for biorelated polymers and applications (IUPAC Recommendations 2012). Pure Appl Chem, 2012, 84: 377–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. The United States Pharmacopeial Convention. The Second Supplement to the Pharmacopeia of theUnited States of America: 11th decennial revision (USP XI-1939 Supplement). 1939

  16. Truhlsen SM. The recession operation: histopathologic response, and suture reaction and absorption. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc, 1965, 63: 626–677

    Google Scholar 

  17. USP in U.S. Law. http://www.usp.org/print/about-usp/legal-recognition/ usp-us-law

  18. USP develops and publishes standards for drug substances, drug products, excipients, and dietary supplements in the United States Pharmacopeia-National Formulary (USP-NF)

  19. United States Public Law 94-295. 1976

  20. United States Pharmacopeia. http://www.usp.org/

  21. British Pharmacopeia. https://www.pharmacopoeia.com/

  22. European Pharmacopoeia. http://online.pheur.org/EN/entry.htm

  23. Williams DF. TheWilliams Dictionary of Biomaterials. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1999

  24. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodegradation

  25. Jones RG, Kahovec J, Stepto R, et al. Compendium of Polymer Terminology and Nomenclature: IUPAC Recommendations 2008. Cambridge: RSC Publishing, 2009

  26. Higashi S, Yamamuro T, Nakamura T, et al. Polymer-hydroxyapatite composites for biodegradable bone fillers. Biomaterials, 1986, 7: 183–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. de Groot K. Bioceramics of Calcium Phosphate. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1983

  28. Hollinger JO, Battistone GC. Biodegradable bone repair materials synthetic polymers and ceramics. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1986, 207: 290–306

    Google Scholar 

  29. ASTMD653-14, Standard Terminology Relating to Soil, Rock, and Contained Fluids. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014. https://www.astm.org/Standards/D653.htm

  30. Witte F, Hort N, Vogt C, et al. Degradable biomaterials based on magnesium corrosion. Curr Opin Solid State Mater Sci, 2008, 12: 63–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lynn DM, Langer R. Degradable poly(ß-amino esters): synthesis, characterization, and self-assemblywith plasmidDNA. JAmChem Soc, 2000, 122: 10761–10768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Cima LG, Vacanti JP, Vacanti C, et al. Tissue engineering by cell transplantation using degradable polymer substrates. J Biomech Eng, 1991, 113: 143–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Zhang S, Zhang X, Zhao C, et al. Research on an Mg-Zn alloy as a degradable biomaterial. Acta Biomater, 2010, 6: 626–640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Anseth KS, Metters AT, Bryant SJ, et al. In situ forming degradable networks and their application in tissue engineering and drug delivery. J Control Release, 2002, 78: 199–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Forrest ML, Koerber JT, Pack DW. A degradable polyethylenimine derivative with low toxicity for highly efficient gene delivery. Bioconjugate Chem, 2003, 14: 934–940

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. ASTM E2747-11, Standard Specification for Evaluation and Selection of Onsite Offices for Environmentally Sustainable Meetings, Events, Trade Shows, and Conferences. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2011. https://www.astm.org/Standards/ E2747.htm

  37. ASTM E2745-11, Standard Specification for Evaluation and Selection of Audio Visual (AV) and Production for Environmentally Sustainable Meetings, Events, Trade Shows, and Conferences. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2011. https://www.astm.org/Standards/E2745.htm

  38. ASTM E2746-11, Standard Specification for Evaluation and Selection of Communication and Marketing Materials for Environmentally Sustainable Meetings, Events, Trade Shows, and Conferences. ASTMInternational,West Conshohocken, PA, 2011. https://www.astm.org/Standards/E2746.htm

  39. ASTM E2741-11, Standard Specification for Evaluation and Selection of Destinations for Environmentally Sustainable Meetings, Events, Trade Shows, and Conferences. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2011. https://www.astm.org/Standards/ E2741.htm

  40. ASTM E2773-11, Standard Specification for Evaluation and Selection of Food and Beverage for Environmentally Sustainable Meetings, Events, Trade Shows, and Conferences. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2011. https://www.astm.org/Standards/ E2773.htm

  41. ASTM E2742-11, Standard Specification for Evaluation and Selection of Exhibits for Environmentally SustainableMeetings, Events, Trade Shows, and Conferences. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2011. https://www.astm.org/Standards/E2742.htm

  42. ASTM E2774-11, Standard Specification for Evaluation and Selection of Venues for Environmentally Sustainable Meetings, Events, Trade Shows, and Conferences. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2011. https://www.astm.org/Standards/E2774.htm

  43. ASTM F2902-12, Standard Guide for Assessment of Absorbable Polymeric Implants. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2012. https://www.astm.org/Standards/F2902.htm

  44. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resorption

  45. Venes D. Taber’s Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary, 22th edition. Philadelphia: F. A. Davis Company, 2013

  46. Zheng YF, Gu XN, Witte F. Biodegradable metals. Mater Sci Eng- R-Rep, 2014, 77: 1–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Hanawa T. Metal ion release from metal implants. Mater Sci Eng-C, 2004, 24: 745–752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Zreiqat H, Howlett CR, Zannettino A, et al. Mechanisms of magnesium-stimulated adhesion of osteoblastic cells to commonly used orthopaedic implants. J Biomed Mater Res, 2002, 62: 175–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Little PJ, Bhattacharya R, Moreyra AE, et al. Zinc and cardiovascular disease. Nutrition, 2010, 26: 1050–1057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Seager H. Drug-delivery products and the Zydis fast-dissolving dosage form. J Pharm Pharmacol, 1998, 50: 375–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Shikinami Y. Shape-memory, biodegradable and absorbable material. U.S. Patent No. 6,281,262, 2001-8-28

  52. Huitema TW, Knight GW, Ransick MH, Schulze DR. Surgical implant with preferential corrosion zone. U.S. Patent No. 7,905,902, 2011-3-15

  53. Luzier WD. Materials derived from biomass/biodegradable materials. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1992, 89: 839–842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Gross RA, Kalra B. Biodegradable polymers for the environment. Science, 2002, 297: 803–807

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Trumbo P, Schlicker S, Yates AA, et al. Dietary reference intakes for energy, carbohydrate, fiber, fat, fatty acids, cholesterol, protein and amino acids. J Am Diet Assoc, 2002, 102: 1621–1630

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Chambin O, Champion D, Debray C, et al. Effects of different cellulose derivatives on drug release mechanism studied at a preformulation stage. J Control Release, 2004, 95: 101–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Fundueanu G, Constantin M, Esposito E, et al. Cellulose acetate butyrate microcapsules containing dextran ion-exchange resins as self-propelled drug release system. Biomaterials, 2005, 26: 4337–4347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Märtson M, Viljanto J, Hurme T, et al. Is cellulose sponge degradable or stable as implantation material? An in vivo subcutaneous study in the rat. Biomaterials, 1999, 20: 1989–1995

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Patel N, Padera R, Sanders GH, et al. Spatially controlled cell engineering on biodegradable polymer surfaces. The FASEB journal, 1998, 12: 1447–1454

    Google Scholar 

  60. Goldstein A. Effect of convection on osteoblastic cell growth and function in biodegradable polymer foam scaffolds. Biomaterials, 2001, 22: 1279–1288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Wu L, Ding J. In vitro degradation of three-dimensional porous poly(D,L-lactide-co-glycolide) scaffolds for tissue engineering. Biomaterials, 2004, 25: 5821–5830

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Wu L, Ding J. Effects of porosity and pore size on in vitro degradation of three-dimensional porous poly(D,L-lactide-co-glycolide) scaffolds for tissue engineering. J Biomed Mater Res, 2005, 75A: 767–777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Pan Z, Ding J. Poly(lactide-co-glycolide) porous scaffolds for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Interface Focus, 2012, 2: 366–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Yu L, Zhang Z, Zhang H, et al. Biodegradability and biocompatibility of thermoreversible hydrogels formed from mixing a sol and a precipitate of block copolymers in water. Biomacromolecules, 2010, 11: 2169–2178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Wen X, Tresco PA. Fabrication and characterization of permeable degradable poly(DL-lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA) hollow fiber phase inversion membranes for use as nerve tract guidance channels. Biomaterials, 2006, 27: 3800–3809

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Chu CFL, Lu A, Liszkowski M, et al. Enhanced growth of animal and human endothelial cells on biodegradable polymers. BBA-Gen Subjects, 1999, 1472: 479–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Jo S, Engel PS, Mikos AG. Synthesis of poly(ethylene glycol)-tethered poly(propylene fumarate) and its modification with GRGD peptide. Polymer, 2000, 41: 7595–7604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Park JH, Allen MG, Prausnitz MR. Biodegradable polymer microneedles: fabrication, mechanics and transdermal drug delivery. J Control Release, 2005, 104: 51–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Freed LE, Vunjak-Novakovic G, Biron RJ, et al. Biodegradable polymer scaffolds for tissue engineering. Nat Biotechnol, 1994, 12: 689–693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Windecker S, Serruys PW, Wandel S, et al. Biolimus-eluting stent with biodegradable polymer versus sirolimus-eluting stent with durable polymer for coronary revascularisation (LEADERS): a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet, 2008, 372: 1163–1173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Stefanini GG, Kalesan B, Serruys PW, et al. Long-term clinical outcomes of biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease (LEADERS): 4 year follow-up of a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet, 2011, 378: 1940–1948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Raungaard B, Jensen LO, Tilsted HH, et al. Zotarolimus-eluting durable-polymer-coated stent versus a biolimus-eluting biodegradable-polymer-coated stent in unselected patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (SORT OUT VI): a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet, 2015, 385: 1527–1535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Freed LE, Grande DA, Lingbin Z, et al. Joint resurfacing using allograft chondrocytes and synthetic biodegradable polymer scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res, 1994, 28: 891–899

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Poirier Y, Nawrath C, Somerville C. Production of polyhydroxyalkanoates, a family of biodegradable plastics and elastomers, in bacteria and plants. Nat Biotechnol, 1995, 13: 142–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Dias A, Tsuru K, Hayakawa S, et al. Crystallisation studies of biodegradable CaO-P2O5 glass with MgO and TiO2 for bone regeneration applications. Glass Technol, 2004, 45: 78–79

    Google Scholar 

  76. Klein CPAT, de Groot K, Drißsen AA, et al. Interaction of biodegradable ß-whitlockite ceramics with bone tissue: an in vivo study. Biomaterials, 1985, 6: 189–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Ikenaga M, Hardouin P, Lemaître J, et al. Biomechanical characterization of a biodegradable calcium phosphate hydraulic cement: a comparison with porous biphasic calcium phosphate ceramics. J Biomed Mater Res, 1998, 40: 139–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Dias AG, Lopes MA, Santos JD, et al. In vivo performance of biodegradable calcium phosphate glass ceramics using the rabbit model: histological and SEM observation. J Biomater Appl, 2006, 20: 253–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Lee JH, Lee CK, Chang BS, et al. In vivo study of novel biodegradable and osteoconductive CaO-SiO2-B2O3 glass-ceramics. J Biomed Mater Res, 2006, 77A: 362–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Song G, Song S. A possible biodegradablemagnesium implantmaterial. Adv Eng Mater, 2007, 9: 298–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Kim WC, Kim JG, Lee JY, et al. Influence of Ca on the corrosion properties of magnesium for biomaterials. Mater Lett, 2008, 62: 4146–4148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Li Z, Gu X, Lou S, et al. The development of binary Mg-Ca alloys for use as biodegradablematerials within bone. Biomaterials, 2008, 29: 1329–1344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Wan Y, Xiong G, Luo H, et al. Preparation and characterization of a new biomedical magnesium-calcium alloy. Mater Des, 2008, 29: 2034–2037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Seong JW, Kim WJ. Development of biodegradable Mg-Ca alloy sheets with enhanced strength and corrosion properties through the refinement and uniformdispersion of theMg2Ca phase by highratio differential speed rolling. Acta Biomater, 2015, 11: 531–542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Zhang S, Li J, Song Y, et al. In vitro degradation, hemolysis and MC3T3-E1 cell adhesion of biodegradable Mg-Zn alloy. Mater Sci Eng-C, 2009, 29: 1907–1912

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Li J, Song Y, Zhang S, et al. In vitro responses of human bone marrow stromal cells to a fluoridated hydroxyapatite coated biodegradable Mg-Zn alloy. Biomaterials, 2010, 31: 5782–5788

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Brar HS, Wong J, Manuel MV. Investigation of the mechanical and degradation properties of Mg-Sr and Mg-Zn-Sr alloys for use as potential biodegradable implant materials. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 2012, 7: 87–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Bornapour M, Muja N, Shum-Tim D, et al. Biocompatibility and biodegradability of Mg-Sr alloys: the formation of Sr-substituted hydroxyapatite. Acta Biomater, 2013, 9: 5319–5330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Gu XN, Xie XH, Li N, et al. In vitro and in vivo studies on a Mg-Sr binary alloy system developed as a new kind of biodegradable metal. Acta Biomater, 2012, 8: 2360–2374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Hänzi AC, Gerber I, Schinhammer M, et al. On the in vitro and in vivo degradation performance and biological response of new biodegradableMg-Y-Zn alloys. Acta Biomater, 2010, 6: 1824–1833

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Chou DT, Hong D, Saha P, et al. In vitro and in vivo corrosion, cytocompatibility and mechanical properties of biodegradable Mg-Y-Ca-Zr alloys as implant materials. Acta Biomater, 2013, 9: 8518–8533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Zong Y, Yuan G, Zhang X, et al. Comparison of biodegradable behaviors of AZ31 and Mg-Nd-Zn-Zr alloys in Hank’s physiological solution. Mater Sci Eng-B, 2012, 177: 395–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Tie D, Feyerabend F, Müller WD, et al. Antibacterial biodegradable Mg-Ag alloys. Eur Cell Mater, 2013, 25: 284–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Vojtech D, Kubásek J, Serák J, et al. Mechanical and corrosion prop- erties of newly developed biodegradable Zn-based alloys for bone fixation. Acta Biomater, 2011, 7: 3515–3522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Li H, Yang H, Zheng Y, et al. Design and characterizations of novel biodegradable ternary Zn-based alloys with IIA nutrient alloying elements Mg, Ca and Sr. Mater Des, 2015, 83: 95–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Liu X, Sun J, Yang Y, et al. Microstructure, mechanical properties, in vitro degradation behavior and hemocompatibility of novel Zn-Mg-Sr alloys as biodegradable metals. Mater Lett, 2016, 162: 242–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Wu C, Qiu H, Hu X, et al. Short-term safety and efficacy of the biodegradable iron stent in mini-swine coronary arteries. Chin Med J (Engl), 2013, 126: 4752–4757

    Google Scholar 

  98. Purnama A, Hermawan H, Champetier S, et al. Gene expression profile of mouse fibroblasts exposed to a biodegradable iron alloy for stents. Acta Biomater, 2013, 9: 8746–8753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Hermawan H, Purnama A, DubeD, et al. Fe-Mn alloys formetallic biodegradable stents: degradation and cell viability studies. Acta Biomater, 2010, 6: 1852–1860

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Sheridan MH, Shea LD, Peters MC, et al. Bioabsorbable polymer scaffolds for tissue engineering capable of sustained growth factor delivery. J Control Release, 2000, 64: 91–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Shawe S, Buchanan F, Harkin-Jones E, et al. A study on the rate of degradation of the bioabsorbable polymer polyglycolic acid (PGA). J Mater Sci, 2006, 41: 4832–4838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Palmerini T, Biondi-Zoccai G, Della Riva D, et al. Clinical outcomes with bioabsorbable polymer-versus durable polymer-based drug-eluting and bare-metal stents. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2014, 63: 299–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Tanimoto S, Serruys PW, Thuesen L, et al. Comparison of in vivo acute stent recoil between the bioabsorbable everolimus-eluting coronary stent and the everolimus-eluting cobalt chromium coronary stent: insights from the ABSORB and SPIRIT trials. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2007, 70: 515–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Tsuji H, Sasaki H, Sato H, et al. Neuron attachment properties of carbon negative-ion implanted bioabsorbable polymer of poly-lactic acid. Nucl Instr Meth Phys Res Sect B-Beam Interact Mater Atoms, 2002, 191: 815–819

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Aikawa M, Miyazawa M, Okamoto K, et al. A novel treatment for bile duct injury with a tissue-engineered bioabsorbable polymer patch. Surgery, 2010, 147: 575–580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Waksman R, Pakala R, Kuchulakanti PK, et al. Safety and efficacy of bioabsorbablemagnesium alloy stents in porcine coronary arteries. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2006, 68: 607–617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Di Mario C, Griffiths H, Goktekin O, et al. Drug-eluting bioabsorbable magnesium stent. J Interv Cardiol, 2004, 17: 391–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Erbel R, Di Mario C, Bartunek J, et al. Temporary scaffolding of coronary arteries with bioabsorbable magnesium stents: a prospective, non-randomised multicentre trial. Lancet, 2007, 369: 1869–1875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Schranz D, Zartner P, Michel-Behnke I, et al. Bioabsorbable metal stents for percutaneous treatment of critical recoarctation of the aorta in a newborn. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2006, 67: 671–673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  110. Gu X, Zheng Y, Cheng Y, et al. In vitro corrosion and biocompatibility of binarymagnesium alloys. Biomaterials, 2009, 30: 484–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Hiromoto S, Inoue M, Taguchi T, et al. In vitro and in vivo biocompatibility and corrosion behaviour of a bioabsorbable magnesium alloy coated with octacalcium phosphate and hydroxyapatite. Acta Biomater, 2015, 11: 520–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  112. Hiromoto S, Tomozawa M, Maruyama N. Fatigue property of a bioabsorbable magnesium alloy with a hydroxyapatite coating formed by a chemical solution deposition. J Mech Behav Biomedical Mater, 2013, 25: 1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  113. Bowen PK, Drelich J, Goldman J. Zinc exhibits ideal physiological corrosion behavior for bioabsorbable stents. Adv Mater, 2013, 25: 2577–2582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  114. Liu X, Sun J, Yang Y, et al. In vitro investigation of ultra-pure Zn and its mini-tube as potential bioabsorbable stent material. Mater Lett, 2015, 161: 53–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  115. Lin W, Zhang G, Cao P, et al. Cytotoxicity and its testmethodology for a bioabsorbable nitrided iron stent. J Biomed Mater Res, 2015, 103: 764–776

    Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Coe JD, Vaccaro AR. Instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with bioresorbable polymer implants and iliac crest autograft. Spine, 2005, 30: S76–S83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Ignatius AA, Augat P, Ohnmacht M, et al. A new bioresorbable polymer for screw augmentation in the osteosynthesis of osteoporotic cancellous bone: a biomechanical evaluation. J Biomed Mater Res, 2001, 58: 254–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  118. Krucoff MW, Kereiakes DJ, Petersen JL, et al. A novel bioresorbable polymer paclitaxel-eluting stent for the treatment of single and multivessel coronary disease. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2008, 51: 1543–1552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  119. Kostopoulos L, Karring T. Guided bone regeneration in mandibular defects in rats using a bioresorbable polymer. Clin Oral Implants Res, 1994, 5: 66–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Dubok VA. Bioceramics—yesterday, today, tomorrow. Powder Metall Metal Ceram, 2000, 39: 381–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  121. Safronova T, Kuznetsov A, Korneychuk S, et al. Calcium phosphate powders synthesized from solutions with [Ca2+]/[PO4 3-]=1 for bioresorbable ceramics. Cent Eur J Chem, 2009, 7: 184–191

    Google Scholar 

  122. Bohner M. Bioresorbable ceramics. In: Buchanan FJ (Ed.). Degradation Rate of Bioresorbable Materials. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing, 2008, 95–114

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  123. Seitz JM, Eifler R, Stahl J, et al. Characterization of MgNd2 alloy for potential applications in bioresorbable implantable devices. Acta Biomater, 2012, 8: 3852–3864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  124. Wen CE, Yamada Y, Shimojima K, et al. Porous bioresorbablemagnesium as bone substitute. MSF, 2003, 419–422: 1001–1006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  125. Campos CM, Muramatsu T, Iqbal J, et al. Bioresorbable drug-eluting magnesium-alloy scaffold for treatment of coronary artery disease. Int J Mol Sci, 2013, 14: 24492–24500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  126. Kirkland NT, Birbilis N, Walker J, et al. In-vitro dissolution ofmagnesium-calcium binary alloys: clarifying the unique role of calcium additions in bioresorbable magnesium implant alloys. J Biomed Mater Res, 2010, 95B: 91–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  127. Gastaldi D, Sassi V, Petrini L, et al. Continuum damage model for bioresorbable magnesium alloy devices —application to coronary stents. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 2011, 4: 352–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  128. Kitabata H, Waksman R, Warnack B. Bioresorbable metal scaffold for cardiovascular application: current knowledge and future perspectives. Cardiovasc Revasc Med, 2014, 15: 109–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Programof China (2016YFC1102402), National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC, 51431002), and the NSFC and the Research Grants Council (RGC) of Hong Kong Joint Research Scheme (51361165101 and 5161101031).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Materials Science and Engineering, College of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, 100871, China

    Yang Liu  (刘洋) & Yufeng Zheng  (郑玉峰)

  2. Biomaterials Research and Development, Medical Product Division, W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc, Flagstaff, Arizona, 86003, USA

    Byron Hayes  (拜伦海耶斯)

Authors
  1. Yang Liu  (刘洋)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yufeng Zheng  (郑玉峰)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Byron Hayes  (拜伦海耶斯)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yufeng Zheng  (郑玉峰).

Additional information

Yang Liu received his bachelor degree in materials science and engineering from Harbin engineering University in 2013. Then he continued his study as a PhD candidate in Prof. Yufeng Zheng’s Lab in Peking University. His research interests are mainly focused on the corrosion study of absorbable metallic biomaterials, as well as the development of new kind of Mg-based biomaterials

Yufeng Zheng obtained his PhD degree from Harbin Institute of Technology in 1998. He is the National Outstanding Youth and Yangtze River scholar of China. His research interests are focused on the development of novel biomaterials and application and design of biomedical devices.

Byron Hayes, an over 35 year employee of W.L. Gore, has been involved in the commercial development of multiple absorbable polymeric implants since the late 1980s. Hayes started his standards development activities with ASTM in 2000, where he is actively developing standards for polymeric and metallic absorbable implants. In 2010, Hayes also became involved with ISO Technical Committees TC150 and TC194 and is now convener of working groups focused on cardiovascular and metallic absorbable implants.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, Y., Zheng, Y. & Hayes, B. Degradable, absorbable or resorbable—what is the best grammatical modifier for an implant that is eventually absorbed by the body?. Sci. China Mater. 60, 377–391 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40843-017-9023-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40843-017-9023-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation